G. J. Wassink

Risk factors associated with the prevalence of footrot in sheep from 1999 to 2000

A postal survey of the techniques being used for the treatment and control of footrot in sheep flocks between November 1999 and October 2000 was conducted in England and Wales in November 2000. Of the 392 questionnaires circulated, 251 (64 per cent) were returned, and 209 of these were usable. Negative binomial regression analysis indicated that the isolation of bought-in sheep, and the separation and individual treatment of diseased sheep with parenteral antibiotics, foot trimming and topical foot sprays were associated with a significantly lower prevalence of footrot in a flock. In contrast, ewe flocks which were routinely foot trimmed more than once a year had a significantly higher prevalence of footrot. No evidence was found that footbathing a flock reduced the level of footrot, except on the 14 per cent of farms where the penning and race facilities for footbathing were reported by the farmer to be excellent. Vaccination had no significant beneficial effect on the level of footrot in a flock.

A within farm clinical trial to compare two treatments (parenteral antibacterials and hoof trimming) for sheep lame with footrot

From observational studies, farmers who use parenteral antibacterials to promptly treat all sheep with footrot (FR) or interdigital dermatitis (ID) have a prevalence of lameness of < 2% compared with a prevalence of 9% lameness reported by farmers who treat lame sheep by trimming affected feet. We tested the hypothesis that prompt treatment of sheep lame with naturally developing FR or ID with parenteral and topical antibacterials reduces the prevalence and incidence of lameness with these conditions compared with less frequent treatment with trimming of hoof horn and applying topical antibacterials.A further hypothesis was that reduction of ID and FR would improve productivity. A lowland sheep flock with 700 ewes was used to test these hypotheses in an 18-month within farm clinical trial with four groups of ewes: two intervention and two control. The duration and severity of lameness was used to categorise sheep into three weighted scores of lameness (WLS): never lame (WLS0), mildly lame/lame for < 6 days (WLS1) and severely or chronically lame (WLS2). The intervention reduced the prevalence of lameness due to FR and ID in ewes and lambs and the incidence of lameness in ewes. The WLS was also significantly lower in sheep in the intervention groups. Ewes with a higher WLS were subsequently significantly more likely to have a body condition score < 2.5 and to have lame lambs. Significantly more ewes lambed and successfully reared more lambs that were ready for slaughter at a younger age in the intervention versus control groups. There was an increase in the gross margin of Pound630/100 ewes mated in the intervention group, including the cost of treatment of Pound150/100 ewes mated. We conclude that prompt parenteral and topical antibacterial treatment of sheep lame with ID and FR reduced the prevalence and incidence of these infectious conditions and led to improved health, welfare and productivity.

The inter- and intra-observer reliability of a locomotion scoring scale for sheep.

A seven point locomotion scoring scale, ranging from 0=normal locomotion to 6=unable to stand or move, has been developed. To test the between and within observer reliability of the scale, 65 movie clips of sheep with normal and varying degrees of abnormal locomotion were made. Three observers familiar with sheep locomotion were trained to read the movie clips. Thirty clips were randomly selected and used to test between and within observer agreement. There was high inter-(intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]=0.93, weighted kappa [kappa(w)]=0.93) and intra-(ICC=0.90, kappa(w)=0.91) observer reliability, with no evidence of observer bias. The main between score differences were for scores 0 (normal) and 1 (uneven posture and shortened stride but no head movement). The results indicate that the locomotion scoring scale using groups of defined observations for each point on the scale was reliable and may be a useful research tool to identify and monitor locomotion in individual sheep when used by trained observers.

Risk factors associated with the prevalence of interdigital dermatitis in sheep from 1999 to 2000

As part of an investigation into improving the treatment and control of lameness in sheep flocks in England and Wales, a postal survey was conducted in November 2000. Farmers were asked to estimate the prevalence of footrot and interdigital dermatitis in their flocks. In the ewes the prevalence of interdigital dermatitis remained relatively stable throughout the year, but there was a large increase in lambs during late spring and early summer. Logistic regression models were used to assess statistically significant risk factors associated with prevalences of the condition of 5 per cent or more in ewes and 10 per cent or more in lambs. Factors that increased the risk in ewes were ‘sometimes/never’ catching lame sheep compared with ‘always’ farm land 100 m or less above sea level and renting-in winter grazing; factors that increased the risk in lambs were a prevalence of 5 per cent or more of footrot in ewes, ‘sometimes/never’ catching lame ewes compared with ‘always’, ‘sometimes/never’ treating ewes with footrot with parenteral antibiotics compared with ‘always’ showing sheep at agricultural events, farm land 100 m or less above sea level, and a prevalence of 5 per cent or more of interdigital dermatitis in ewes. Turning sheep on to a field which had been free from livestock for at least two weeks after footbathing decreased the risk of interdigital dermatitis in lambs. Footbathing without the use of a clean field compared with not footbathing did not significantly affect the prevalence of the interdigital dermatitis.

Factors associated with changes of state of foot conformation and lameness in a flock of sheep

The aim of this research was to investigate transitions between foot conformation, lameness and footrot in sheep. Data came from one lowland flock of approximately 700 ewes studied for 18 months. Multilevel multistate analyses of transitions between good and poor foot conformation states in ewes, and lame and non-lame states in ewes and lambs were conducted. Key results were that the longer sheep had feet in good conformation, the more likely they were to stay in this state; similarly, the longer a ewe was not lame the more likely she was not to become lame. Ewes with poor foot conformation were more likely to become lame (OR: 1.83 (1.24-2.67)) and to be >4 years (OR: 1.50 (1.09-2.05)). Ewes with footrot were less likely to move to good foot conformation (OR: 0.48 (0.31-0.75)) and were more likely to become lame (OR: 3.81 (2.60-5.59)). Ewes lame for >4 days and not treated with parenteral antibacterials had a higher risk of developing (OR: 2.00 (1-3.61)), or remaining in (OR: 0.49 (0.29-0.95)), poor foot conformation compared with ewes never lame. Treatment of ewes lame with footrot with parenteral antibacterials increased the probability of transition from a lame to a non-lame state (OR: 1.46 (1.05-2.02)) and these ewes, even if lame for >4 days, were not more likely to develop poor foot conformation. The risk of a ewe becoming lame increased when at least one of her offspring was lame (OR: 2.03 (1.42-2.92)) and when the prevalence of lameness in the group was ≥5% (OR: 1.42 (1.06-1.92)). Lambs were at increased risk of becoming lame when they were male (OR: 1.42 (1.01-2.01)), single (OR: 1.86 (1.34-2.59)) or had a lame dam or sibling (OR: 3.10 (1.81-5.32)). There were no explanatory variables associated with lambs recovering from lameness. We conclude that poor foot conformation in ewes increases the susceptibility of ewes to become lame and that this can arise from untreated footrot. Treatment of ewes lame with footrot with parenteral antibacterials leads to recovery from lameness and prevents or resolves poor foot conformation which then reduces the susceptibility to further lameness with footrot.

Footrot and interdigital dermatitis in sheep: Farmer satisfaction with current management, their ideal management and sources used to adopt new strategies

The aims of this research were to identify management practices that sheep farmers currently use to treat and prevent footrot in sheep and whether they consider that these are successful management tools and to find out how sheep farmers would ideally like to manage footrot in their flock. Over 90% of lameness in sheep in the UK is caused by Dichelobacter nodosus, which presents clinically as interdigital dermatitis (ID) alone or with separation of hoof horn (FR). A questionnaire was sent to 265 farmers to investigate their current management and their satisfaction with current management of the spectrum of clinical presentations of footrot. Farmers were also asked their ideal management of footrot and their interest in, and sources of information for, change. Approximately 160 farmers responded. Farmers satisfied with current management reported a prevalence of lameness < or = 5%. These farmers caught and treated lame sheep within 3 days of first seeing them lame, and treated sheep with FR and ID with parenteral antibacterials. Farmers dissatisfied with their management reported a prevalence of lameness >5%. These farmers practised routine foot trimming, footbathing and vaccination against footrot. Whilst 89% of farmers said they were satisfied with their management of FR over 34% were interested in changing management. Farmers identified veterinarians as the most influential source for new information. Farmers reported that ideally they would control FR by culling/isolating lame sheep, sourcing replacements from non-lame parents, trimming feet less, using antibacterial treatments less and using vaccination more. Footbathing was a commonly used management that was linked with dissatisfaction and that also was listed highly as an ideal management. Consequently, some of the ideal managements are in agreement with our understanding of disease control (culling and isolation, sourcing healthy replacements) but others are in contrast with our current knowledge of management and farmers self-reporting of satisfaction of management of footrot (less use of antibacterial treatment, more footbathing and vaccination). One explanation for this is the theory of cognitive dissonance where belief follows behaviour, i.e. farmers report that they believe an ideal which is what they are currently doing, even if the management is sub-optimal.

Footrot and interdigital dermatitis in sheep: farmers’ practices, opinions and attitudes

In 1999, a study was initiated to improve the treatment and control of footrot and interdigital dermatitis in sheep flocks in England and Wales. In November 2000, a retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted in which 392 sheep farmers were asked to estimate the prevalence of footrot and interdigital dermatitis in their flock in the previous 12 months, whether they considered these diseases to be a problem, how they treated and controlled them and their opinion on the success of the treatment and control measures that they used; 209 of them provided usable responses. The farmers tended to be more concerned as the prevalence of the diseases increased; 91 per cent of the farmers with a prevalence of footrot of less than 5 per cent considered it a small or very small problem on their farm, but 51 per cent of the farmers with a prevalence of 5 per cent or more also considered it to be a small or very small problem. Approximately 60 per cent of the farmers who used parenteral antibiotics considered that they were good or excellent at treating footrot, and this treatment was associated with a prevalence of less than 5 per cent. A similar proportion of farmers also considered topical foot sprays and footbathing to be good or excellent for controlling footrot or interdigital dermatitis, but these treatments were not associated with a lower prevalence of footrot or interdigital dermatitis. Of the 29 farmers who used a footrot vaccine, 20 (69 per cent) considered it good to excellent and this was associated with a prevalence of footrot of less than 5 per cent in their flock; however, vaccination was not associated with lower levels of footrot across the whole sample. Farmers spent approximately 34 minutes per sheep per year treating and controlling footrot; 31 per cent were prepared to spend more money and more time to manage footrot, 27 per cent were prepared to spend more time, 19 per cent were prepared to spend more money and 23 per cent were not prepared to do either. The farmers who were willing to invest more money or more money and time had a higher prevalence of footrot.

Impact of rapid treatment of sheep lame with footrot on welfare and economics and farmer attitudes to lameness in sheep

This review article summarises the evidence for an effective management protocol for footrot to sheep, the welfare and economic benefits of such a protocol and its likely uptake by farmers. Over 90% of lameness in sheep in England is caused by Dichelobacter nodosus, the aetiological agent of footrot. Farmers can recognise lame sheep both from video clips and when examining their own sheep but make a separate decision about whether to catch lame sheep. Only farmers who catch and treat mildly lame sheep immediately report a low prevalence of lameness ( 5% and used whole-flock footbathing and vaccination. Overall, farmers stated that their ideal managements would be footbathing and vaccination. One explanation for this apparent inconsistency is that farmers want effective vaccines and footbaths; an alternative explanation is that this is an example of cognitive dissonance, where subjects adopt a belief because it is their current practice despite evidence that it is not effective. We conclude that farmers can identify lame sheep and that rapid treatment of individual sheep lame with footrot with intramuscular and topical antibacterials is currently the most effective control of interdigital dermatitis and footrot in sheep but that in future effective measures that prevent footrot would be ideal.